Before this is all over, MS will be charging users to extract their snapshots from a proprietary cloud-only one drive account. The recovery process will take about 3 hours, and involve scrolling through ai-authored help articles that don’t lay out clearly and methodically how to access the old snapshots. The comments on the help articles will begin with “Hello sir, can you confirm that you have followed the steps at this link?”. The link, before delivering you to an irrelevant solution, will shunt you to a landing page that forces you to log into your microsoft account before you can see the answer.
It’s so baffling though. Sincerely believing “these are just left wing accusations” and maga/swamp slogans, maps onto “the judge had a conflict of interest, this was a witch hunt” etc., by the exact same route of illusion.
The only way I can make sense of this, is to assume that we’re not really dealing with sincere belief. It’s hard to imagine a rational Republican that stood behind the former president through everything since the birth certificate thing, and are now somehow chastened. Maybe they simply think it’ll be a bad look for their guy to be wearing an ankle bracelet on inauguration day / in the first 100 days in office, and it will compromise their party’s future election chances. A question of ‘ick’ factor, and not some extension of actual values and beliefs, like we might hope. “Convicted felon” is a soft Dean scream, maybe.
It’s true that sex wasn’t paid for. The role of pressure in this case is complicated.
If anyone is curious to read Daniels’ own words on this, check out the pdf court transcripts for May 7th and May 9th.
The transcripts are long, but interesting, and worth reading if you have a few hours. As a normie, I was only interested in the sex stuff. The facts surrounding documents seem pretty clear.
“We don’t understand. Why aren’t people simply searching for Taylor Swift”
I think “they’re just words, get over it” is a good argument in favour of pronoun declaration, no?
For real!
Anyone have a link to the actual police report? Asking for a friend.
So bad it’s good. Personally, I like the description text on the video that makes it seem like the teen who was autopsied is speaking:
An autopsy of a Massachusetts teen who died after participating in a spicy tortilla chip challenge says he died from eating a lot of chile pepper extract, and 14-old Harris Wolobah had a congenital heart defect.
Editorially, it’s a hilarious article. Though, respect to journalists out there. This might be a situation of, “Johnson, I need that tortilla chip death article on my desk in 5 minutes”.
edit: Per the correction in the article, I guess AP style guidelines dictate ‘chile’ instead of ‘chili’. It looks super weird to me!
Time to dust off the tennis ball walker.
all it took to convince them evolution is completely wrong is a couple paragraphs about Lamarck and giraffes and Haeckel and embryos
That’s incredibly shocking and concerning.
By proclaiming Newton is wrong, it leads to people concluding that all science is wrong, because there is always someone working on the next iteration
I’ve never had sympathy for this line of thinking. Is the average person truly too ignorant to understand that science is a constantly developing process of better understanding our universe, not some set of unimpeachable rules carved into stone tablets once and forever? The fact that science can be updated, changed, revolutionized, is what makes it powerful.
If people need to be ‘protected’ from that fact, there is something fundamentally wrong with the way science is taught in schools. I can’t accept that the average person can’t comprehend such a simple idea that would take less than an hour to convincingly communicate.
Just kind of dawned on me while looking at the number, Reddit’s licensing deal with Google is valued at $60 million per year. That’s really not very much money at all, considering the amount of data Reddit has and continues to accumulate. And chump change for Google, no doubt. Reveals how little leverage Reddit actually has at this point. This was their flagship deal, and the best they could get was $60mil per year.
Also puts the API fiasco in a new light. “Look, we need to charge for API calls, because we need to restrict public access to data as a precondition of selling all your shit in a few months to Google, for the financial equivalent of a cup of coffee.”
it’s an AMERICAN MILITARY DEFENSE CONTRACTOR worth billions
Probably one reason why the FAA isn’t immediately shutting Boeing’s shit down, you know when doors fall off their planes mid-flight, and investigations uncover more problems.
Think it’s more of an allusion to lurking habits, active times, metadata, stuff not related to public posts. I’d imagine the average user has plenty of stuff they’ve browsed through that they wouldn’t want their family / co-workers, etc. to know.
Would also need to get a burner phone number w/ answering machine to take calls from 240 million grandmas, cheapskate businesses and cash-strapped public schools for any & all tech support questions until the end of time, because if there was an issue with system stability in any way whatsoever, or if the router went down or the printer stopped working, they’d assume it was the fault of ‘the guy who changed everything’.
Linux is great & everything, but this sounds like a recipe for utter disaster, not a way to make an easy buck.
Interesting. I’m curious to know more about what you think of training datasets. Seems like they could be described as a stored representation of reality that maybe checks the boxes you laid out. It’s a very different structure of representation than what we have as animals, but I’m not sure it can be brushed off as trivial. The way an AI interacts with a training dataset is mechanistic, but as you describe, human worldviews can be described in mechanistic terms as well (I do X because I believe Y).
You haven’t said it, so I might be wrong, but are you pointing to freewill and imagination as somehow tied to intelligence in some necessary way?
Thanks! I’m not clear on what you mean by a worldview simulation as a scratch pad for reasoning. What would be an example of that process at work?
For sure, defining intelligence is non trivial. What clear the bar of intelligence, and what doesn’t, is not obvious to me. So that’s why I’m engaging here, it sounds like you’ve put a lot of thought into an answer. But I’m not sure I understand your terms.
Not being combative or even disagreeing with you - purely out of curiosity, what do you think are the necessary and sufficient conditions of intelligence?
This seems interesting. What’s the context here?